Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Popular movies that you hate


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Mr. Gorman said:

@SEPIATONE:   Here's a tidbit of info in regards to pre-release 'cuts' and on-screen credits; maybe you'll find it interesting + it was a popular movie at the time.

We have the psycho-sexual thriller SEA OF LOVE (1989).  If you've seen the theatrical version you know Lorraine Bracco is not featured in the film even thought she filmed at least 2 scenes and so she does not get an on-screen credit in the theatrical version as her part was cut out in its entirety.  Not even 5 seconds remained like Cyril Cusack in "Harold and Maude".

For an inexplicable reason, in the year 2000 . . . Universal released "Sea of Love" on VHS for the 3rd time under a heading that says 'UNIVERSAL THRILLERS'  and this version of the movie featured Lorraine Bracco's name in the opening credits and her part was put back into the movie (along with an extra scene with William Hickey as 'Frank Sr.' and another scene involving Al Pacino's mid-life crisis where he gets paranoid on the street observing a potential suspect).  

This particular VHS-issue puzzles me.  Did someone working at Universal issue the 'pre-release version' complete with Lorraine Bracco's credit and part restored on purpose?  Or was it just an odd mistake the company made?  I'm not privy to the inner workings of movie studios "Homevideo" divisions, but I find this kind of stuff fascinating.   

1990:  SEA OF LOVE released on tape by 'MCA Home Video'. 

1995:  SEA OF LOVE re-released on tape by 'MCA/Universal Home Video'.

2000:  SEA OF LOVE released again on VHS under the 'Universal Thrillers' heading with the pre-release version on the videocassette instead of the theatrical version.  Except there is nothing on the video box or cassette label to indicate this is a different version of the movie but, sure enough, when I plunked this 2000-issue tape into my VCR it's not the theatrical version contained therein. 

Y'know, I've seen other movies, even from the '30's and '40's(and can't recall which ones) that had a name in the opening credits but I haven't been able to spot anywhere in the flick.  But putting in previously cut out scenes with people not originally credited is something I'm not familiar with.

5 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

I never saw it when it first came out, but wanted to. I tried watching it in 2020 and couldn't get interested after the first half hour. I chalked it up to just being too old for the storyline. 

Same for A CHRISTMAS STORY. I just found the charactors mean. The sight of a toddler in a snow suit (or bunny suit?) did not strike me as hilarious.  The kids were really nasty to each other, the parents weren't the nicest either. Just didn't like it. 

But I still say "Fra-gil-lé", thought that one line was cute.

I've liked this movie from jump, probably because of the history of me and some buddies scampering off with their Dad's copies of PLAYBOY and in my early adulthood subscribing to the mag and being entertained also by many of the  humorous JEAN SHEPHERD "semiautobiographical" stories,  including "A Christmas Story" 's   amalgam of stories from Shepherd's  "In God We Trust: All Others Pay Cash".

1.  There were NO "toddlers" in either a snowsuit or bunny suit.  The snowsuit scene( hilarious in it's "I can't put my arms down!"  protest)  involves charactEr  "Randy" younger brother of main protagonist RALPHIE, and as Randy was getting prepared for walking to school in a Cleveland, Ohio winter, a 1940's Mom might feel all that layering was necessary.  And of course, Randy being school age meant he was WAY past being the age of a toddler.  And it was older brother RALPHIE  in the rabbit outfit, which as you might recall, was a bunny designed one piece PAJAMA,  made by an Aunt of his that Ralphie  explained, "Labored under the belief that I was not only a girl, but perpetually four years old."  

2.  The parents were as nice as most typical parents of 1940 probably were,  with the Mother(you might have noticed) very nice in spite of Dad, who, like most Dads of the time, typically displayed a lot of bluster.  But inside was just an old softie,  as if you recall,  it was HE that provided his son with the much coveted Daisy BB gun  the Mother was all against, issuing her deadly "You'll shoot your eye out".  protest( and one me, my brother and many other friends often heard as well).    And her niceness came out in the form of coyly getting finicky Randy to eat his dinner, and  never mentioning Ralphie's outburst of profanity when he was whipping the snot out of neighborhood bully SCUT FARKUS  to Dad.  And Scut was the only kid really nasty to the other kids,  So I don't get that complaint. 

And what kid DIDN'T, ever in their life, want some particular toy or whatever for Christmas SO bad, it totally consumed their thoughts the entire Christmas season?  ;) 

And be honest...  How many here  actually ran the risk of getting "soap poisoning"  for foolishly emitting some profanity at one time or another?  ;) 

Sepiatone

Sepiatone

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

One popular film that didn't really care for was Dr. Zhivago.  I see the appeal of the way it was shot and the lovely landscape, and the amazing score, but despite being set during a memorable period in history (one that i haven't actually seen too many US films cover) the actual story i don't like. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, rjbartrop said:

Not to defend Ferris, but hen you think about it, most movie character behaviour comes off as pretty crazy when judged by real world standards.    In a lot of cases, part of their appeal is things people fantasize about doing if they weren't held back by those very necessary social conventions.

Yes, but look at the classic Textbook symptoms of Sociopathy:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

Quote

 

Antisocial personality disorder is defined by a pervasive and persistent disregard for morals, social norms, and the rights and feelings of others.[4] Although behaviors vary in degree, individuals with this personality disorder will typically have limited compunction in exploiting others in harmful ways for their own gain or pleasure, and frequently manipulate and deceive other people. While some do so through a façade of superficial charm, others do so through intimidation and violence.[16] They may display arrogance, think lowly and negatively of others, and lack remorse for their harmful actions and have a callous attitude towards those they have harmed.[4][5]...

Those with antisocial personality disorder are often impulsive and reckless, failing to consider or disregarding the consequences of their actions. They may repeatedly disregard and jeopardize their own safety and the safety of others, which can place both themselves and other people in danger....

People with antisocial personality disorder usually form poor or reduced attachments and emotional bonds, and interpersonal relationships often revolve around the exploitation and abuse of others.[4] They may have difficulties in sustaining and maintaining relationships, and some have difficulty entering them.[17]

Ferris is a hip parasite who doesn't give a flying crap about Cameron's life, leeches possessions off of his parents, just wants Sloane as a coolness trophy, and wouldn't sacrifice himself to give anything to any of his friends unless he could look godlike and superior doing it.  

He's the poster boy of Teen Narcissism, when it's cool to be 100% self-absorbed, before the adult onset of the brain's capability to understand social needs and group-social responsibility kicks in.  And coming from a 40-something writer with distinct maturity issues, that's either cynical or sad.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Yes, but look at the classic Textbook symptoms of Sociopathy:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

Ferris is a hip parasite who doesn't give a flying crap about Cameron's life, leeches possessions off of his parents, just wants Sloane as a coolness trophy, and wouldn't sacrifice himself to give anything to any of his friends unless he could look godlike and superior doing it.  

He's the poster boy of Teen Narcissism, when it's cool to be 100% self-absorbed, before the adult onset of the brain's capability to understand social needs and group-social responsibility kicks in.  And coming from a 40-something writer with distinct maturity issues, that's either cynical or sad.

I couldn't agree more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, Sepiatone:  Nailed it and a walk-off home run to boot on "Christmas Story." 

But since the thread is popular movies one doesn't like, I'll put mine in the mix.  "Tootsie."  

I like the premise and I like Sydney Pollack.  That's pretty much as far as it goes with me.  I just find that there's too much Dustin Hoffman in his portrayal as a woman.  It's a caricature when everyone around him is buying into it -- maybe like if you had a regular movie but with Roger Rabbit as the lead.  Hoffman's movements, mannerisms, and speech seem too much flibberty-jibbet to the point that I think most people around him would find "her" very peculiar.  I'm all for allowing the audience to be in on an inside line about a character -- we're storytelling here -- but  I just don't find it all as persuasive as the rest of the world does with "Tootsie."  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Yes, but look at the classic Textbook symptoms of Sociopathy:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

Ferris is a hip parasite who doesn't give a flying crap about Cameron's life, leeches possessions off of his parents, just wants Sloane as a coolness trophy, and wouldn't sacrifice himself to give anything to any of his friends unless he could look godlike and superior doing it.  

He's the poster boy of Teen Narcissism, when it's cool to be 100% self-absorbed, before the adult onset of the brain's capability to understand social needs and group-social responsibility kicks in.  And coming from a 40-something writer with distinct maturity issues, that's either cynical or sad.

Oh,  lighten up, you're reading way too much into what is simply a light-hearted little teen film.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brianNH said:

Boy, Sepiatone:  Nailed it and a walk-off home run to boot on "Christmas Story." 

But since the thread is popular movies one doesn't like, I'll put mine in the mix.  "Tootsie."  

I like the premise and I like Sydney Pollack.  That's pretty much as far as it goes with me.  I just find that there's too much Dustin Hoffman in his portrayal as a woman.  It's a caricature when everyone around him is buying into it -- maybe like if you had a regular movie but with Roger Rabbit as the lead.  Hoffman's movements, mannerisms, and speech seem too much flibberty-jibbet to the point that I think most people around him would find "her" very peculiar.  I'm all for allowing the audience to be in on an inside line about a character -- we're storytelling here -- but  I just don't find it all as persuasive as the rest of the world does with "Tootsie."  

Oddly, I like this film.  Hoffman can chew the scenery with the best of them, but his bit in the Russian Tea Room with Pollack still cracks me up.  And Bill Murray and Teri Garr are very funny.  Dumb premise?  Of course, but still fun in my book.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had never seen Harold and Maude before, though I've read about it over the years. I'm wary

of movies that become cult classics. Some are genuinely overlooked fine films, others are

just the same old garbage they were when they first came out. Harold and Maude was charming

in an off beat way, but I didn't take it very seriously. Maude is one of those old timers who have

that let's go out and do something, isn't life great spirit. Sometimes that's nice to hear, at other times

it gets annoying. Harold was one of those eccentric heirs with his eccentricity centered on death and

dying. To each their own. Their friendship made for an interesting pairing, if a not very believable one.

Hey, it's the early 1970s ya know. Now if I had Harold's dough, or his mother's dough to be more accurate,

I'd wouldn't spend it on going to funerals and driving around in a hearse. So a fairly good movie, made

even better by all those Cat Stevens' songs. Yeah baby, it's a wild world.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, overeasy said:

Oddly, I like this film.  Hoffman can chew the scenery with the best of them, but his bit in the Russian Tea Room with Pollack still cracks me up.  And Bill Murray and Teri Garr are very funny.  Dumb premise?  Of course, but still fun in my book.

By the time we get the big soap-opera reveal ("How far back should we pull the camera?" "How d'you feel about Cleveland?"), we're WELL into 30's-screwball territory, but with the polish of 80's sitcom humor.  Even without Hoffman, Soapdish (1991) almost feels like it was the spinoff-sequel to the soap-set comedy.

Also, it demonstrates the old four-pronged rule about drag humor:  Intentional bad-drag by a comic who knows he looks ridiculous (eg. Milton Berle) is misogynist and icky; good-drag by a character who wants to do it (eg. Tyler Perry) is uncomfortably suspect on the part of the comic; bad-drag by a character who doesn't want to do it (eg. "Honeybun" from South Pacific) is corny and outdated, but good drag by a character who doesn't want to do it manages to keep some comic potential.  That closeup on the look in Hoffman's eyes as he finds out his character's contract has been renewed demonstrates this principle singlehandedly.  😐

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of drag . . . think I'd rather watch OUTRAGEOUS! (1977-Canada/U.S.) than TOOTSIE. 

Craig Russell was quite good playing a variety of female stars.   The 'drag' is not done for tacky effect in my opinion. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/4/2021 at 4:32 PM, misswonderly3 said:

Oh,  lighten up, you're reading way too much into what is simply a light-hearted little teen film.  

On reading way to much into it...

I read a theory a few years back that someone had written in which they argued that Ferris didn't actually exist. He was only a manifestation of Cameron's Id trying to overcome his (Cameron) Superego.  He (the author) went on to say that Cameron's Superego won out in the end and the Id was suppressed never to be heard from again until an adult Cameron (who had changed his name to hide his shameful past) after years of being stuck in a meaningless, monotonous dead end job, living a bland joyless life following societal norms as his Superego dictated suddenly met a new/old friend. One who encouraged him to let loose. Give in to his desires. Accept the joys and the pain that free life has to offer.... like underground bare knuckle boxing. And to never order the cream soups at a restaurant.  Ferris had come back! But he changed his name too in order to get around the Superego. Ferris now went by Tyler Durden.

Yep, this guy had made a damn good case for Fight Club being a sequel to Ferris Bueller's Day Off. 

I was quite impressed with his reasoning and the time and effort he'd obviously put into it. Then I remembered the conspiracy theory I'd read years ago about how Frank Baum's Wizard of Oz was a veiled prophecy of the Kennedy assassination and how lucid and reasonable that author made their theory sound (Ruby slippers- Jack Ruby, Oz- Oswald) and it made me think. It made me think some people should never have been introduced to 'shrooms.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/4/2021 at 4:32 PM, misswonderly3 said:

Oh,  lighten up, you're reading way too much into what is simply a light-hearted little teen film.  

What about the narration Ferris;   isn't this a way to explain or in some way justify,  his  100% self-absorbed, sociopathic behavior?

If the producer and director really wanted to make a simply light-hearted little teen film,  I see no reason for said narration.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Citizen Ed said:

On reading way to much into it...

I read a theory a few years back that someone had written in which they argued that Ferris didn't actually exist. He was only a manifestation of Cameron's Id trying to overcome his (Cameron) Superego.  He (the author) went on to say that Cameron's Superego won out in the end and the Id was suppressed never to be heard from again until an adult Cameron (who had changed his name to hide his shameful past) after years of being stuck in a meaningless, monotonous dead end job, living a bland joyless life following societal norms as his Superego dictated suddenly met a new/old friend. One who encouraged him to let loose. Give in to his desires. Accept the joys and the pain that free life has to offer.... like underground bare knuckle boxing. And to never order the cream soups at a restaurant.  Ferris had come back! But he changed his name too in order to get around the Superego. Ferris now went by Tyler Durden.

Yep, this guy had made a damn good case for Fight Club being a sequel to Ferris Bueller's Day Off. 

I was quite impressed with his reasoning and the time and effort he'd obviously put into it. Then I remembered the conspiracy theory I'd read years ago about how Frank Baum's Wizard of Oz was a veiled prophecy of the Kennedy assassination and how lucid and reasonable that author made their theory sound (Ruby slippers- Jack Ruby, Oz- Oswald) and it made me think. It made me think some people should never have been introduced to 'shrooms.

Sheesh,  what a bunch of pretentious twaddle.  Not from you, Ed,  I hasten to say !  I'm referring to the theory you read about Ferris Bueller.

Look,  I'm done defending this movie,  I only saw it twice,   it's just not important enough to analyze like that.   I'm amazed it's engendered such discussion here.

However !    You also bring up Fight Club in your comments.  Now there's a popular movie I can really get behind hating !  And I do,  I hate, loathe, and despise Fight Club  !  For one thing,  it drives me crazy that everyone thinks it's so profound and meaningful.  It's not,  its whole premise is a cheap trick to fool the audience -- and no matter how much one is paying attention,  the first time one sees the film there's no way they could guess the big surprise.

   SPOILER  RE.  FIGHT CLUB COMING UP:   I mean,  think about it...Edward Norton is beating himself up, he ties himself to a chair and throws himself down the stairs ??  ( at least,  that's the way I remember it....)   It's just ridiculous.   This film is so full of itself,  it thinks it's so cool and unfathomable and  cryptic,  it thinks it's making a big statement about society,  blahblah.  But  it's just a bunch of rubbish !  There !  Feels good to say that !

PLUS......I also hate The Social Network,   cold as ice,  unengaging,  almost impossible to follow,  boring,  I don't care about these Facebook founder guys,  and the film does nothing to make me care.  Everyone is selfish and boring and phony.  But I wouldn't mind all that if the movie kept me engaged,  but it's soooo boring !  

...guess I just can't stand David Fincher .   

edit: I just looked him up to see if he made anything I like,  and discovered he also made the execrable Benjamin Button.  Hoo boy,  can't find the words to describe that one,  truly annoying and vacuous,  pretending it's got something to offer to think about,  when it's just friggin'  idiotic and irritating !   So no surprise it's made by David  ice-cold makes-movies-that-pretend-they're-about-something-when-they're-just-bumptious-drivel -  Fincher  !

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Citizen Ed said:

On reading way to much into it...

I read a theory a few years back that someone had written in which they argued that Ferris didn't actually exist. He was only a manifestation of Cameron's Id trying to overcome his (Cameron) Superego. 

There's also a theory that the Zack Morris in SAVED BY THE BELL is a fantasy of the Zack Morris from GOOD MORNING, MISS BLISS  (which is  packaged in syndication as " Season 1" of SAVED BY THE BELL aka  SAVED BY THE BELL:  JUNIOR HIGH ).

tumblr_inline_oa4c4gAf1N1s786z0_1280.png

zack-and-kelly-saved-by-the-bell.jpg

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Well, art is art, isn't it? Still, on the other hand, water is water. And east is east and west is west and if you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does."

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/4/2021 at 5:45 PM, Vautrin said:

I had never seen Harold and Maude before, though I've read about it over the years. I'm wary

of movies that become cult classics. Some are genuinely overlooked fine films, others are

just the same old garbage they were when they first came out. Harold and Maude was charming

in an off beat way, but I didn't take it very seriously. Maude is one of those old timers who have

that let's go out and do something, isn't life great spirit. Sometimes that's nice to hear, at other times

it gets annoying. Harold was one of those eccentric heirs with his eccentricity centered on death and

dying. To each their own. Their friendship made for an interesting pairing, if a not very believable one.

Hey, it's the early 1970s ya know. Now if I had Harold's dough, or his mother's dough to be more accurate,

I'd wouldn't spend it on going to funerals and driving around in a hearse. So a fairly good movie, made

even better by all those Cat Stevens' songs. Yeah baby, it's a wild world.

 

"If you want to be me, be me, if you want to be you, be you...."

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/4/2021 at 5:39 PM, overeasy said:

Oddly, I like this film.  Hoffman can chew the scenery with the best of them, but his bit in the Russian Tea Room with Pollack still cracks me up.  And Bill Murray and Teri Garr are very funny.  Dumb premise?  Of course, but still fun in my book.

"Does Jeff know?"

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

"If you want to be me, be me, if you want to be you, be you...."

Typical A.K.A. Stunningly simple and profoundly deep at the same time. 🙂

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, misswonderly3 said:

What,  no David Fincher fans to  leap to his defence ?  And here I thought he was such a revered director.  

 

I hear his name quite often as one of the best directors working today but I was familiar enough to know what movies he'd actually done so I looked up his credits.  I thought Seven (or Se7en, talk about pretentious 🙄) was good take on the overused serial killer horror subgenre. And I thought his followup film the Game was absolutely brilliant. Other than those two I can't say anything has really stood out for me and even those I enjoy more for the acting and story than his skills as a director. Gotta say I'm less than impressed with his work.

12 hours ago, misswonderly3 said:

Sheesh,  what a bunch of pretentious twaddle.  Not from you, Ed,  I hasten to say !  I'm referring to the theory you read about Ferris Bueller.

Nah, not to worry.  I try not to be pretentious but my ramblings are twaddle too.😏

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't hate THE SOCIAL NETWORK, but I also don't grade it as highly as others do.

I'm mixed on David Fincher.....I really like SEVEN, but I can't stand ALIEN 3. The rest of his work is between average and below average or somewhere in between.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, HoldenIsHere said:

4TB5Vhl.png

Yeah, I thought TOOTSIE was fun too, and in reference to this scene, I like when BILL MURRAY walks in on the goings on and when  George Gaynes leaves, looks disgusted at Hoffman  and says; "You...S L U T!"  :D 

Sepiatone

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...